We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.

I need to tell my lovely bride that she shouldn't tell anyone that breastfeeding is natural anymore. If she does, people may assume it was her that breastfed our children instead of me. Oh, the horror!

I was a little disappointed in the story on Israel's Weapon Wizards. I know it was only a book review, but I was hoping for some more insight into the methods. The root cause for Israel's success seems to be that the IDF won't take substandard weapons when they can adapt something better suited to their purposes. The Tavor is a great example. They needed a battle weapon that wouldn't jam, clog, malfunction or be too hard to maintain. So they develop this baby:

https://www.iwi.us/iwi/media/Gun-Pages/Tavor/TSB16L.jpg

It is a superb weapon. I recommend the 18 inch barrel, which allows it to be shorter than the AR 15 with a 16 inch barrel. I don't want to get into any fights about the merits of the AR 15, but I do think the Tavor is at least as good in most respects and better in others.

It seems that the Israelis are quicker to adapt innovations and refinements to their weapons than most other militaries. I guess when your survival depends on having people and weapons that will work instantly with very little room for error, you can't accept the lowest priced contract very often.

I have a serious question...it may seem stupid, but I really don't know the answer:

Does a department HAVE to spend money allocated to it by Congress? For example, if Congress is funding 'climate change initiatives' and the EPA is run by someone who is changing the interior workings of the EPA to get rid of 'climate change initiatives,' can the EPA just NOT spend the money?

I assumed that just b/c money is in a budget, doesn't mean it needs to be spent. That if a department didn't spend something, that was fine. Am I wrong?

My assumption is that previous to this administration, all departments wanted to spend every penny allocated and, therefore, the heads of these departments gladly spent it.

But what if the EPA or the Dept. of Energy doesn't want or need to spend that money? Anyone have an answer???

Right. But isn't that what Trump wants to do? He wants to cut the State Dept. by 30% and the EPA by 25%. Etc. If the Dems give Trump more money than he needs to run the EPA...well, isn't that good news? He can just NOT spend it. In other words, does Trump actually have more control over saving $$ than this budgeting process implies?

Dems think they are allocating $ for everything they want, but can they force these departments to spend it? I'm just trying to understand this from a very simple perspective. I don't know if we've ever been in this situation before...

The Congress wants to give X dollars to EPA, DOE, etc., but Trump doesn't want to use that money and cuts staff and redirects the focus on each department...leaving some of this money untouched. Maybe some $ are directed to grants through EPA that Pruitt doesn't intend to award. That kind of thing.

Technically both you and Sam are right. Budgeting the $ doesn't mean that the dept has to spend it. And I would hope that our current cabinet would cut spending on this climate boondogle and other liberal party favors. The problem for those Secretaries is that if they impound the funds by not spending everything budgeted, they will get less next year for what they really need.

Hard to tell until all the shoes have dropped, but yes it seems like a victory for Trump (and those of us who like a lower debt) in the short term. Will see if his cabinet officials agree after the next budget cycle has been set in stone. The key is both Trump and his cabinet having the political will to see this through.

Of course the press and usual liberal suspects will scream that he is killing the poor and minority among us (because he is Hitler, ya know!). I think that the average Joe Sixpack voter sees through this liberal wolf cry at this point. The more the libs do it now the less it works.

I think these are the death throes of a dying liberal movement. We shall see, though. If PT Barnum was right, you can fool all the people some of the time.

I just watched all of Mulvaney's press presentation and Q&A from earlier today. Sounds like the Dems lied about what the budget contained and that Trump actually won several things...including millions of dollars for a kind of wall on the border that will substantially help to quell illegal immigration and drug flow. Also money for defense.

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: